• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NASA releases a simulated video of falling into a black hole.

Ahriman's pledge

Neo Member
I have no idea how fringe this is, but it's definitely thought provoking!
Just like for string theory, the bigger question is: can it be tested?
Right now, this theory confirms more than 10 predictions, that's way more than any other theory/model .
This guy was also a key element/pioneer in the developpement of MHD (since the end of the 70's), leading to Russia's hypersonic tech ( he fixed the problem of the Velikhov instability in a small maid's room with basically no money and diy hardware)
French institutions-CNRS-never believed/understand in his work. He's a pariah, but a brillant brain even in his 80s. Truly fascinating personality.
 
lu3z83gopkr21.jpg

Disgusting and lewd as always, nice !
 

efyu_lemonardo

May I have a cookie?
There have been more confirmations since then. By JamesWeb, and Cern. This model also can run stable spiral-shapes galaxies simulations . no other model can.
Spent some more time reading about this model. The kind of predictions it makes about dark matter behavior and distribution seem to be similar to what you'd expect from some of the MOND theories. And I had thought those were ruled out. But perhaps such theories were only concerned with modifying Newtonian gravity for all matter in the universe, rather than only for some of it.

Has anyone attempted to simulate what a mass distribution of Janus-type negative metric matter would look like? Can it indeed explain the gravitational effects we see that are attributed to (positive metric) dark matter?

And a bigger issue: according to the theory, negative metric matter does not have a symmetrical gravitational manifestation in the positive metric spacetime!
Unlike regular gravitation which creates a central field.
Wouldn't this predict measurable phenomena? And what is the physical meaning of these principal directions of a particular saddle-point relative to those of other negative metric masses?
 
Last edited:

Ahriman's pledge

Neo Member
Spent some more time reading about this model. The kind of predictions it makes about dark matter behavior and distribution seem to be similar to what you'd expect from some of the MOND theories. And I had thought those were ruled out. But perhaps such theories were only concerned with modifying Newtonian gravity for all matter in the universe, rather than only for some of it.

Has anyone attempted to simulate what a mass distribution of Janus-type negative metric matter would look like? Can it indeed explain the gravitational effects we see that are attributed to (positive metric) dark matter?

And a bigger issue: according to the theory, negative metric matter does not have a symmetrical gravitational manifestation in the positive metric spacetime!
Unlike regular gravitation which creates a central field.
Wouldn't this predict measurable phenomena? And what is the physical meaning of these principal directions of a particular saddle-point relative to those of other negative metric masses?
Here you can find a cartoon vulgarisation of the model, writen and illustrated by JP Petit himself
you can find much more on this site, btw

(Janus model (involving negative masses) can run a model of a spirale galaxy for 30 turns.)
 

subsmoke

Member
My guess is that a black hole is a solid object like neutron stars are. They might be more compact neutron stars or the gravity might be so strong that the neutrons are broken down into quarks. You wouldn't really fall into a black hole, you'd fall onto it where the intense gravity would reduce you down to elementary particles.
 

Trogdor1123

Member
My guess is that a black hole is a solid object like neutron stars are. They might be more compact neutron stars or the gravity might be so strong that the neutrons are broken down into quarks. You wouldn't really fall into a black hole, you'd fall onto it where the intense gravity would reduce you down to elementary particles.
It sounds like you are describing a quark star which is likely a real thing too. There are some measurements out there that might be those stars.

As for a black having some kind of surface, who knows. The math shows that it should sink down to a singularity but also that a singularity doesn’t make any real sense. The things are so confusing. Time and space even swap in it. Black holes are super interesting.
 
Top Bottom